Don't Stop the Music!

The Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (DBERR) is conducting a consultation on 'legislative options to address illicit peer-to-peer file sharing', or downloading music from the internet as it's better known to most of us. This follows the Gowers Review in December 2006, which recommended "industry agreement of protocols . . . to remove and disbar users engaged in 'piracy'".

It all began in the late 1990s with the emergence of Napster, as US based file sharing site which enabled users to share their music files, which as a dotcom company was closed down in 2001 following a lawsuit from the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). As a result of the publicity from the lawsuit, launched a couple of years earlier, Napster's subscriber base increased from 9 million to 50 million.

In the Napster case, multimillionaire artists like Dr Dre and Metallica were wheeled into court to bemoan lost revenue on behalf their corporate publishers. What the case sparked was a flowering of new improved subscriber-less technologies that enabled file sharing without the corporate hub of a Napster.

Research cited in the consultation shows that between 25%-43% of all internet users download copyrighted music – however this rises to 63% of young people, who download an average of 53 tracks per month. But is today's generation of young people so different to the one that preceded it – who bought bulk purchases of TDK-90s to record albums from our mates onto tape?

And is the music industry really losing £1bn over five years, as they allege? Young people download music, just as they copied it onto blank tapes a generation ago, because they can't afford it – and it remains overpriced. So the music industry is losing only a tiny fraction, as most of the illicit downloaders have little disposable income.

Don't get me wrong, I think musicians should be able to make a living from their work, but it's highly questionable that the ability to make a living is seriously threatened – and musicians agree! A survey of US professional musicians in 2004 found that 60% thought lawsuits against individuals would not benefit them in any way, and only 3% thought the internet had a negative effect on their ability to protect their work.

This great mutually-beneficial sharing phenomena is costing the corporates though, and so the government department dedicated to business is consulting on ways to tackle the 'problem'. The music publishing division of EMI made a profit of £106m last year, meanwhile Sony BMG currently scrapes by on a profit of over £100m per quarter.

Today it isn't just music which is downloaded, but films, books, and even PC games – which resulted in Topware Interactive successfully suing a British woman for over £16,000 for sharing a 3D pinball game. Which rather begs the question – why is the Government consulting on further enforcement when prosecutions, with generous settlements, are already being secured?

Some of the options under consideration look largely incompatible with various EC Directives, while others simply implore ISPs and copyright holders to conspire more effectively. The consultation document can be downloaded (legally) from the DBERR website, and the deadline for responses is 30th October 2008.